Thread Tools

Whether you like Fox News or not, how do you think the Obama administration's campaign against Fox News will play out? I like their campaign against Fox News, and so far I don't think it's doing Obama any harm. I think with characters like Beck, Fox News is becoming a sort of Jerry Springer of news stations, entertaining but not serious.

Then one could fairly say the same thing about any of the MS sources. I am not suprised that a 'progressive' like yourself is tolerant of the attempts to supress any dissent it is a characteristic of the left.

Cite any threads here for example where anyone approved of a campaign against say MSNBC or CNN for example.

I think most Americans (I & R) will find it objectionable that the President is trying to silence a TV channel, whether you consider it to be news, entertainment or some of both. If he doesn't want to be interviewed on it, fine, but to try to freeze it out to the point of attempting to silence it is very sad. obama and rahm are very sad, small human beings.

I Think it hurts him more than it helps him. I'm one of those guys that felt he was the best choice for president but I'm becoming increasingly disapointed with his constant finger pointing and excuses. I was hoping for change but it seems to have been just a campaign slogan. Same tired old Washington bullcrap.

Cite any threads here for example where anyone approved of a campaign against say MSNBC or CNN for example.

Click to expand...

I don't know about here but I do know there were plenty of "campaigns" against some other news channels:

In 2001, DeLay "suggested a boycott" of CNN and personally refused to appear on CNN. DeLay, who has lambasted CNN as the "Clinton News Network" and "Communist News Network," actually suggested a boycott of the network during a recent bicameral GOP leadership gathering. None of the others Republican lawmakers who were in attendance agreed to take part.

In 2002, news outlets reported that Republican leaders were boycotting or threatening to boycott CNN's Crossfire in response to the hiring of Democratic strategists James Carville and Paul Begala.

In 2004, NY Times reporters were excluded from Air Force Two.

In the wake of a June 23, 2006, New York Times article (as well as articles in the Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal) describing a secret Bush administration program designed to monitor international financial transactions, GOP Rep. J.D. Hayworth authored a letter reportedly signed by 70 House members calling on House Speaker Dennis Hastert to "penalize" the Times by rescinding its congressional press credentials.

In May 2008, Bush White House counselor Ed Gillespie publicly accused NBC of engaging in "deceitful editing" in its airing of portions of an interview NBC reporter Richard Engel conducted with Bush. In a letter to NBC News president Steve Capus, Gillespie wrote, "I'm sure you don't want people to conclude that there is really no distinction between the 'news' as reported on NBC and the 'opinion' as reported on MSNBC, despite the increasing blurring of those lines." Fox News personalities subsequently questioned why Bush would agree to be interviewed by NBC in the first place and applauded the White House's decision to attack NBC.

Jim Pinkerton: NBC "declared war on the White House. Why shouldn't the White House be fighting back?" From the discussion about Gillespie's letter on the May 24, 2008, Fox News Watch (from Nexis):

Interestingly enough when the shoe was on the other foot and The Reublicans were leading the charge to have The New York Times press credentials removed they had this to say regarding it's legality and their right to do so:

"By courtesy and custom, there is a standing committee of journalists who customarily have determined credentialing for members of the press since back in the 1880s. But in the final analysis, elected members of the House and the Senate, through their respective leaders -- in the case of the House, that would be the speaker -- ultimately, they make the decision," Hayworth said.

He added that yanking the credentials is not a violation of the First Amendment as it wouldn't restrict the Times from reporting on Congress.

"However, it would remove Times reporters from some of the most important real estate in Washington, D.C., the speaker's lobby and the press gallery of the United States Congress," he said.

Hayworth letter: "Times should be penalized" for financial tracking report. Hayworth's letter to Hastert stated: "We are writing to ask you to use your authority to rescind the congressional press credentials of the New York Times. .

(It's good to be aware at this time that at the same time the NYT printed their story the WSJ published virtually the identical information.)

What Bush and Chaney had to say:

President Bush: "Congress was briefed. And what we did was fully authorized under the law. And the disclosure of this program is disgraceful.

Vice President Cheney: "What is doubly disturbing for me is, not only have they gone forward with these stories, but they've been rewarded for it, for example in the case of the terrorists surveillance program by being awarded the Pulitzer Prize for outstanding journalism. I think that is a disgrace."

Another very telling little bit:

During the NBC/Bush period one of the major right wing conservatives said the following:

JIM PINKERTON, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR AND WRITER, AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE: I think absolutely. I think NBC has staked out a position as the most leveling of the broadcast networks and their little cat paws at NBC keep opening this on. And they declared war on the White House. Why shouldn't the White House be fighting back?

I think most Americans (I & R) will find it objectionable that the President is trying to silence a TV channel, whether you consider it to be news, entertainment or some of both. If he doesn't want to be interviewed on it, fine, but to try to freeze it out to the point of attempting to silence it is very sad. obama and rahm are very sad, small human beings.

Click to expand...

Goebbels and the Propaganda Ministry realized that when everything the people heard or saw portrayed the same message, then the people would not think on their own, they would just automatically believe whatever was being portrayed to them.

It's a stupid strategy for the administration to pursue. It is a no-win situation. At best, you bring attention to the station and give them exactly what they want. At worst, you look like you're trying to censor the free press.

Whether you like Fox News or not, how do you think the Obama administration's campaign against Fox News will play out? I like their campaign against Fox News, and so far I don't think it's doing Obama any harm. I think with characters like Beck, Fox News is becoming a sort of Jerry Springer of news stations, entertaining but not serious.

Goebbels and the Propaganda Ministry realized that when everything the people heard or saw portrayed the same message, then the people would not think on their own, they would just automatically believe whatever was being portrayed to them.

Sorry, but that doesn't fly. Independence is not the same thing as objectivity. I couldn't care less that Fox News has a Republican slant (other than the fact that they lie with the slogan "fair and balanced"). You compare Fox with MSNBC, but other than their respective biases, there is no comparison. Fox News is essentially the media arm of the GOP. As soon as someone can justify their organizing and promoting tea party rallies and show me an example of another network or news organization doing something similar to consistently benefit the Democrats, I'll listen. But until then, there really is no parallel to be drawn.

I couldn't care less what your views are. I would expect, though, that moderators on this site are held to a certain standard of decorum (which doesn't include posting bat**** crazy stuff on the forums).

Stop playing dumb. If you watch the video I posted earlier in the thread, it's a pretty good illustration.

Riddle me this:

Click to expand...

This doesn't fly indeed. Obviously devout liberals are not going to see the bias of MSNBC, CNN because they agree with their bias. They are an extension of Obama's party. We can have a circular argument all day.

I couldn't care less what your views are. I would expect, though, that moderators on this site are held to a certain standard of decorum (which doesn't include posting bat**** crazy stuff on the forums).

Click to expand...

We have to learn from history. I didn't call them Nazis (as moonbats have always been quick to do with conservatives) But, no one complained about their control of the media either. Until it was too late.

I always thought the Liberals were for FREEDOM, they complained about Americans flying American Flags IN AMERICA because it might offend the Muslims but they have no problem at all with their Little Tin God trying to silence a News Service because the News Service doesn't slobber, fawn, gush or Kiss Their Comrade Leaders A$s (that is called dictator) communist bastards.

Shouldn't beautiful Barry be concentrating on his Wars and Gitmo.

Every time Stupid Obama opens his mouth and smacks his lips Fox's ratings go through the roof.